JZK vs Glen Morgan The Freedom Foundation

Please support the RSE whistleblowers and citizen journalism and voice your concerns here. Act collectively and hold JZ Knight and the Thurston County public officials accountable for fraud and human rights abuse at RSE. This is about accountability and pursuing justice.
Qui tacet consentire
User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

JZK vs Glen Morgan The Freedom Foundation

Unread post by David McCarthy » Sun Feb 01, 2015 12:27 am

JZK vs Glen Morgan The Freedom Foundation
This just the first 'Broadside' delivered by Glen Morgan and the Freedom Foundation....
THANK YOU Melissa Genson and Glen Morgan,
From all of us at EMF :-)
Melissa Genson,
Something JZ Knight should have learned after I beat her in court last year--she CANNOT win against a Rochester WA farmer! All that happens is that she just hurts herself more. She should have thought about that BEFORE she sued my friend and fellow Rochester farmer Glen Morgan. There is just something magical clinging to our boots. Check out Glen's opening round in the attached document...the really good stuff starts at the bottom of page 6. JZ, you are eventually going to learn that you didn't really beat David McCarthy in court last year and silence him, no matter what the official papers said. All you did was bring Glen, Steve and me into David's life, and he passed the baton to us, to continue his important work. And we've only just begun. To download the attachment, just click into this Full PDF Download link
http://freepdfhosting.com/4bd9d4ec7d.pdf

Related:
EMF View topic - Freedom Foundation Sued for Exposing JZ Knight, Politicians
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=2297&hilit=Glen+Morgan

1

THE HONORABLE BENJAMIN H. SETTLE



JZK, INC., a Washington corporation, and JZ Knight, an individual,
Plaintiffs,

No. C14-05410-BHS
vs.
DDEFENDANT FREEDOM FOUNDATION'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION TO PLAINTIFFS
GLEN MORGAN and LAUREN MORGAN, and the marital community comprised thereof; and EVERGREEN FREEDOM FOUNDATION, a non-profit Washington corporation,
Defendants.
TO: Plaintiffs
AND TO: Plaintiffs' attorneys of record.
Pursuant to FRCP 26, 33, and 34, JZK, Inc. and JZ Knight (“plaintiffs,” “you” and “your”)
is requested to answer the following interrogatorries and requests for production in writing and
under penalty of perjury, and after you and your attorneys sign them below, to serve the original
upon the undersigned counsel at the office of The Freedom Foundation, PO Box 552, Olympia,
Washington 98507. You must serve your answers within thirty (30) days after the interrogatories
and requests for production are served on you. Please asnwer each interrogatory or request for
production in the space provided. Each part and subpart is to be answered completely.

DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 1 C14-05410-BHS

These interrogatories and requests for production impose a continuing obligation pursuant to FRCP 26(e).
DEFINITIONS
As used in these Interrogatories:
1. "Agreement" means a contract, arrangement, or understanding, formal or informal, oral or written, between two or more persons.
2. "Any" means one or more.
3. "Communication" means any disclosure, transfer, or exchange of information or opinion, however made.
4. The phrase "describe in detail" as used in these interrogatories includes a request for a complete description and explanation of the facts, circumstances, analysis, opinion and other information relating to (as that phrase is defined below) the subject matter of a specific interrogatory.
5. "Document" means any written, recorded, or graphic material of any kind, whether prepared by you or by any other person, that is in your possession, custody, or control. The term includes agreements; contracts; letters; telegrams; inter-office communications; memoranda; reports; records; instructions; specifications; notes; notebooks; scrapbooks; diaries; plans; drawings; sketches; blueprints; diagrams; photographs; photocopies; charts; graphs; descriptions; drafts, whether or not they resulted in a final document; minutes of meetings, conferences, and telephone or other conversations or communications; invoices; purchase orders; bills of lading; recordings; published or unpublished speeches or articles; publications; transcripts of telephone conversations; phone mail; electronic-mail; ledgers; financial statements; microfilm; microfiche; tape or disc recordings; and computer print-outs.
DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 2 C14-05410-BHS

6. The term "document" also includes electronically stored data from which information can be obtained either directly or by translation through detection devices or readers; any such document is to be produced in a reasonably legible and usable form. The term "document" includes all drafts of a document and all copies that differ in any respect from the original, including any notation, underlining, marking, or information not on the original. The term also includes information stored in, or accessible through, computer or other information retrieval systems (including any computer archives or back-up systems), together with instructions and all other materials necessary to use or interpret such data compilations.
7. Without limitation on the term "control" as used in the preceding paragraph, a document is deemed to be in your control if you have the right to secure the document or a copy thereof from another person.
8. "Identify" or "identity" means to state or a statement of:
a. In the case of a person other than a natural person, its name, the address of its
principal place of business (including zip code), its telephone number, and the
name of its chief executive officer, as well as, if it has a person other than a
natural person that ultimately controls it, that other person's name, the address of
that person's principal place of business (including zip code), that other person's
telephone number, and the name of that other person's chief executive officer;
b. In the case of a natural person, his or her name, place of residence, personal
physical address and personal mailing address, telephone numbers, e-mail
addresses, known whereabouts, employer, and title or position;
c. In the case of a communication, its date, type (e.g., telephone conversation or
discussion), the place where it occurred, the identity of the person who made the
DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 3 C14-05410-BHS

communication, the identity of the person who received the communication, the identity of each other person when it was made, and the subject matter discussed;
d. In the case of a document, the title of the document, the author, the title or
position of the author, the addressee, each recipient, the type of document, the
subject matter, the date of preparation, and its number of pages; and
e. In the case of an agreement, its date, the place where it occurred, the identity of
all persons who were parties to the agreement, the identity of each person who has
knowledge of the agreement and all other persons present when it was made, and
the subject matter of the agreement.
9. "Including" means including, but not limited to.
10. "Person" means any natural person, corporation, company, partnership, joint venture, firm, association, proprietorship, agency, board, authority, commission, office or other business or legal entity, whether private or governmental.

11. "Relating to" means containing, constituting, considering, comprising, concerning, discussing, regarding, describing, reflecting, studying, commenting or reporting on, mentioning, analyzing, or referring, alluding, or pertaining to, in whole or in part.
12. "Relevant time period" means the time period stated in paragraph 1 of the Instructions below.
13. "Year" means calendar year or the twelve-month period on which your business records are based; if the latter is used in responding to an interrogatory, specify the twelve-month period used.
14. The “March 2011 live streamed event” means any portion of the event held at Plaintiffs’ property from March 2011 to April 2011, and/or any single day(s) within that time



DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 4 C14-05410-BHS


period, which Plaintiffs have alleged was filmed and live streamed and the recording of which Plaintiffs have alleged are copyrighted and the basis of this lawsuit.
INSTRUCTIONS
1. Each interrogatory is to be answered separately, in writing, and as fully as possible. State the name of the person answering that interrogatory, whether information furnished is within the personal knowledge of that person and, if not, the name of the person assisting in the preparation of, or furnishing of, information used in the answer to that interrogatory, and the name of the person to whom such information is a matter of personal knowledge.
2. The omission of any name, fact, or other item of information from the answers shall be deemed a representation that such name, fact or item is not known to you or your counsel at the time of the service of your answer to the interrogatory.
3. If any interrogatory herein cannot be answered in full after exercising due diligence to secure the information to do so, it shall be answered to the extent possible with an explanation as to why a complete answer is not possible.
4. To the extent that you believe that an interrogatory is objectionable, answer so much of the interrogatory as, in your view, is not objectionable and separately state the portion of each interrogatory to which you object and the grounds for your objection.
5. To the extent that you believe that an interrogatory calls for information subject to a privilege, answer so much of each interrogatory that, in your view, is not privileged and separately set forth in a log:
a. The grounds upon which you believe the document is privileged;
b. Whether the document has been withheld or redacted;
c. The date of the document or communication;
DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 5 C14-05410-BHS



24

d. The author(s) of the document or the person(s) who participated in the
communication;
e. The recipient(s) of the document or the person(s) who received the
communication;
f. The title of the document;
g. The type of document (e.g., e-mail, fax, letter, agreement, etc.);
h. The subject of the document or communication, except to the extent that you
claim that the subject itself is privileged; i. The number of pages in the document; and j. The specific request, or requests, to which the document is responsive.
6. To the extent that you believe any interrogatory is ambiguous, your answer should set forth the matter deemed ambiguous and the construction used in responding.
7. These interrogatories are continuing in nature and must be supplemented promptly if the plaintiff obtains additional or different information related to any response at any time before the termination of this action.
8. In lieu of providing a full description of a document in accordance with the above paragraph, you may attach a copy of the document for which a description is requested, and in your answer to the interrogatory only provide those items of description requested which do not appear on the face of the document.
9. When interpreting these interrogatories words in the singular also include their plural. Words used in the plural also include their singular.
FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES Interrogatory No. 1: Identify every person who physically attended the March 2011 live streamed event in whole or in part and indicate the total number of physical attendees.
DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 6 C14-05410-BHS

1

Answer:

Interrogatory No. 2: Identify every person who subscribed and/or viewed the March 2011 live streamed event in whole or in part by viewing the event on the Internet and indicate the total number of subscribers or viewers via the Internet. Answer:
Interrogatory No. 3: Please describe, in detail, the process by which you captured, stored, and streamed the video from the March 2011 live streamed event, and identify the persons who, in any manner, facilitated and managed the technical processes of filming, storing, and/or streaming the video, including the processes by which internet viewers of the event gained access to the internet live-stream of the event and the persons who in any manner facilitated and managed your online content and online viewing capabilities for this event. Answer:
Interrogatory No. 4: What price of attendance and admission did plaintiffs charge and collect from persons in physical attendance at the March 2011 live-streamed event and what price did plaintiffs charge and collect from persons who accessed and viewed the March 2011 live streamed event over the Internet, and what was the total revenue plaintiffs collected from the March 2011 live streamed event. Answer:
Interrogatory No. 5: Identify with specificity the damages you contend you suffered as a result of the alleged copyright violation in this lawsuit.
DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 7 C14-05410-BHS


Answer:
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION Request No. 1: Produce any and all bank records including any and all transactions, deposits, withdrawals, or other banking activity relating to March 2011 live-streamed event.
Response:
Request No. 2: Produce any and all copies of all documents related to any and all financial transactions related to the March 2011 live-streamed event, including, but not limited to receipts, bank records, spreadsheets, and federal, state, and local tax related documents—including the taxes paid related to the March 2011 live-stream event.
Response:
Request No. 3: Produce all communications related to March 2011 live-streamed event, including but not limited to internal communications between employees, volunteers, and any and all other persons acting on behalf of plaintiffs, and any communications between plaintiffs or their representatives and any other person relating to the March 2011 live-streamed event.
Response:
Request No. 4: Produce all records documenting, supporting, or used to determine the damage amount identified in response to Interrogatory Number 5 above.
Response:



DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 8 C14-05410-BHS


CERTIFICATION
I, David Dewhirst, certify that these discovery requests conform with the requirements of FRCP 26, specifically Section (g)(1)(B).
Dated: January 16, 2015

DAVip-ltyp-5. DEWHIRST, WSBA #48229 P^Box 552, Olympia, WA 98507 PH: 360.956.3482 | F: 360.352.1874 DDewhirst@myfreedomfoundation.com



DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 9 C14-05410-BHS



PLAINTIFFS' CERTIFICATION
I, Andrea McNeely (WSBA #36156), have reviewed the foregoing answers to interrogatories and requests for production and hereby certify that these repsonses are in compliance with CR 26(g).
day February, 2015.
ANSWERS and RESPONSES dated this



GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL LLP



Andrea McNeely, WSBA No. 36256 1201 Pacific Avenue, Suite 2100 Tacoma, Washington 98402 amcneely@gth-law.com 253.620.6500



DEFENDANTS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION - 10 C14-05410-BHS
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

User avatar
David McCarthy
Site Admin
Posts: 2422
Joined: Sun Jan 06, 2008 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand
Contact:

Re: JZK vs Glen Morgan The Freedom Foundation

Unread post by David McCarthy » Thu Mar 12, 2015 2:08 am

The Freedom Foundation's Glen Morgan on being sued by JZ Knight
Originally aired: Monday, May 19, 2014
Category: News

The Freedom Foundation's Glen Morgan on being sued by JZ Knight...or maybe it's Ramtha
http://kiroradio.com/listen/9971900/
But he has nothing on at all, cried at last the whole people....

Post Reply

Return to “Lawsuits & Court cases - JZK,Inc - JZ Knight - RSE”